Romain Francoise <rfranco...@debian.org> writes: > Russ Allbery <r...@debian.org> writes:
>> I think unlimited upload access should be simply another one of those >> sets of permissions that some people have and others don't. Those who >> need that access to do their work can receive it after appropriate >> vetting of their ability to use that access appropriately, just as >> someone would volunteer to join ftp-master, or DSA, or keyring-maint, >> or the Lintian maintenance team and would, after appropriate vetting, >> be given additional privileges to do that work. > In your vision of things, who would be responsible for granting > these privileges and judging whether someone can be trusted to have > them? NM and DAM for unlimited upload access, at least. I think it may vary depending on what the permissions are, but for things like that, I don't see any reason to change who is doing the vetting from the current model. > I think our current model of giving all DDs access to the whole archive > if they successfully complete NM works. I do too when NM includes T&S. The point is that we have contributors who aren't interested in packaging and don't have any need or desire to go through T&S and learn a bunch of information about packaging that they'll never use. One shouldn't have to go through that part of NM unless one wants to have unlimited upload access. > We have procedures to deal with abuse, and we have tools to review the > work of others (like the PTS, lintian.d.o, etc). Why move to a culture > of having to ask permission? I don't believe giving people unlimited upload access without going through T&S is a good idea. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87k4mmu166....@windlord.stanford.edu
